LAWS(RAJ)-2007-12-17

STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. RAWAT SINGH

Decided On December 17, 2007
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Appellant
V/S
RAWAT SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the award dated june 6, 2000 passed by the Labour Court, bharatpur in case No. 224/1993. By the impugned order, the Labour Court allowed the reference and passed the order of reinstatement of the respondent No. 1 -workman w. e. f. January 1, 1991 and also ordered that the respondent-workman shall be entitled to one-third of the amount of back-wages from January 1, 1991 till the date of the award. The respondent-workman raised an industrial dispute on the ground that his services were illegally terminated by the department from January 1, 1991 even though he was regularly recruited by an order dated January 15, 1979 as Cattle Guard in the Forest department at Karauli. The dispute was referred by the competent authority for adjudication before the Labour Court on the following terms:

(2.) ON the reference of the said issue, the labour Court adjudicated the same and passed the impugned award of reinstatement w. e. f. January 1, 1991 with one-third back-wages from the said date till the date of the award.

(3.) LEARNED Dy. G. A. Mr. Sharma vehemently submitted that the order of the labour Court is beyond the scope of reference as the issue was referred whether the termination order dated January 1,1991 is legal and valid and as against that the Labour Court has found that the services of the workman were terminated in 1984 and on that basis the Labour court passed the award that the petitioner should be reinstated in service w. e. f. January 1, 1991. Mr. Sharma also further pointed out that even otherwise the Department of Forest cannot be said to be an industry, therefore, even the reference could not have been adjudicated. He further pointed out that when the Labour Court has found that the services of the concerned workman were terminated in the year 1984, the reference which was made in the year 1993 is belated one and on that basis no relief should have been granted.